Advertisement

Wetlands

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 87–99 | Cite as

Salt Marsh Carbon Pool Distribution in a Mid-Atlantic Lagoon, USA: Sea Level Rise Implications

  • Tracy Elsey-QuirkEmail author
  • Denise M. Seliskar
  • Christopher K. Sommerfield
  • John L. Gallagher
Article

Abstract

The distribution of carbon (C) within a salt marsh may vary among vegetation zones depending on production and decomposition dynamics and organic and mineral depositional history. We examined spatial and temporal variation of plant and soil C pools within a salt marsh fringing a coastal lagoon along the mid-Atlantic coast of the U.S. The total plant C pool increased from high marsh shrub to low marsh grass dominated areas. Much of the spatial variation in plant C pool was due to fine roots and small organic matter (dlm) that could not be identified by species, which averaged 2398 g C m−2 in Spartina patens-dominated, 2215 g C m−2 in Spartina alterniflora-dominated, and 676 g C m−2 in Juncus roemerianus-dominated areas. Belowground C pool loss was 36% less for S. patens than S. alterniflora and was similar between S. alterniflora and J. roemerianus. Accretion and C accumulation rates were greater in the S. alterniflora-dominated stand than in the J. roemerianus-dominated stand. Our results suggest that landward migration onto terrestrial soils can lead to an estimated 80% increase in belowground plant C composed primarily of fine roots and dlm and 36–70% increase in soil carbon between 15 and 30 cm depths.

Keywords

Baccharis halimifolia Biomass Decomposition Juncus roemerianus Organic matter Spartina alterniflora Spartina patens 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the University of Delaware Sea Grant and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Sea Grant College (Seagrant # NA05OAR4171041). The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the· National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or the Department of Commerce. We would like to thank many volunteers that helped collect and process plant material including: J. Halchak, W. T. Quirk, M. League, J. Wang, K. Higashikubo, D. Brady, M. Rhode, B. Ciotti, M. Tatinclaux, I. Ngirairikl, M. Jennis, C. Shelley, L. Krimsky, and J. Perelli. S. Moskalski, and D. G. Stuart helped to collect and process cores for 137Cs analysis. We appreciate the thorough and helpful reviews from three anonymous reviewers and associate editor.

References

  1. Blum LK (1993) Spartina alterniflora root dynamics in a Virginia marsh. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 102:169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouchard V, Lefeuvre JC (2000) Primary production and macro-detritus dynamics in a European salt marsh: carbon and nitrogen budgets. Aquat Bot 67:23–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brower JE, Zar JH, von Ende CN (1998) Field and laboratory methods for general ecology, 4rth ed. The McGraw-Hill Companies, IncGoogle Scholar
  4. CCSP (2009) Coastal Sensitivity to Sea-level Rise: A Focus on the Mid-Atlantic Region. A report by the U.S. Climate Change Program and Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Titus JG, Anderson KE, Cahoon DR, Gesch DB, Gill SK, Gutierrez BT, Thieler ER, Williams SJ (Lead Authors). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D. C., USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Choi Y, Wang Y, Hseih Y, Robinson L (2001) Vegetation succession and carbon sequestration in a coastal wetland in northwest Florida: evidence from carbon isotopes. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 15:311–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chmura GL, Anisfeld SC, Cahoon DR, Lynch JC (2003) Global carbon sequestration in tidal, saline wetland soils. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 17:1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Church TM, Sommerfield CK, Velinsky DJ, Point D, Benoit C, Amouroux D, Plaa D, Donard OFX (2006) Marsh sediments as records of sedimentation, eutrophication and metal pollution in the urban Delaware Estuary. Mar Chem 102:72–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Connor R, Chmura GL (2000) Dynamics of above— and belowground organic matter in a high latitude macrotidal salt marsh. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 204:101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Connor RF, Chmura GL, Beecher CB (2001) Carbon accumulation in Bay of Fundy salt marshes: implications for restoration of reclaimed marshes. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 15:943–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Craft CB, Seneca ED, Broome SW (1991) Loss on ignition, and kjeldahl digestion for estimating organic carbon and total nitrogen in estuarine marsh soils: calibration with dry combustion. Estuaries 14:175–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Craft CB (2007) Freshwater input structures soil properties, vertical accretion, and nutrient accumulation of Georgia and U.S. tidal marshes. Limnol Oceanogr 52:1220–1230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cutshall NH, Larsen IL, Olsen CR (1983) Direct analysis of Pb-210 in sediment samples: self-absorption corrections. Nucl Instrum Methods 206:309–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dame RF, Stilwell D (1984) Environmental factors influencing the macrodetritus flux in North Inlet Estuary. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 18:721–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. de la Cruz AA, Hackney CT (1977) Energy value, elemental composition, and productivity of belowground biomass of a Juncus tidal marsh. Ecology 58:1165–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Donnelly JP, Bertness MD (2001) Rapid shoreward encroachment of salt marsh cordgrass in response to accelerated sea-level rise. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:14218–14223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gallagher JL (1974) Sampling macro-organic matter profiles in salt marsh plant root zones. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 38:154–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallagher JL, Pfeiffer WJ (1977) Aquatic metabolism of the communities associated with attached dead shoots of salt marsh plants. Limnol Oceanogr 22:562–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gallagher JL, Plumley FG (1979) Underground biomass profiles and productivity in Atlantic coastal marshes. Am J Bot 66:156–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gallagher JL, Reimold RJ, Linthurst RA, Pfeiffer WJ (1980) Aerial production, mortality, and mineral accumulation-export dynamics in Spartina alterniflora and Juncus roemerianus plant stands in a Georgia salt marsh. Ecology 61:303–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gebrehiwet T, Koretsky CM, Krishnamurthy RV (2008) Influence of Spartina and Juncus on saltmarsh sediments. III Organic geochemistry. Chemical Geology 255:114–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Good RE, Good NF, Frasco BR (1982) A review of primary production and decomposition dynamics of the belowground marsh component. In: Kennedy VS (ed) Estuarine Comparisons. Academic, New York, pp 139–157Google Scholar
  22. Horsley & Witten Inc (1998) Assessment of nitrogen loading to the Delaware Inland Bays. Report to the Delaware Inland Bays National Estuary Program, Nassau, DEGoogle Scholar
  23. Jenny H, Gessel SP, Bingham FT (1949) Comparative study of decomposition rates of organic matter in temperate and tropical regions. Soil Sci 68:419–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Khan H, Brush GS (1994) Nutrient and metal accumulation in a freshwater tidal marsh. Estuaries 17:345–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kraft JC, Yi HI, Khalequzzaman M (1992) Geologic and human factors in the decline of the tidal salt marsh lithosome: the Delaware estuary and Atlantic coastal zone. Sed Geol 80:233–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mahaney WM, Smemo KA, Gross KL (2008) Impact of C4 grass introductions on soil carbon and nitrogen in C3-dominated succesional systems. Oecologia 157:295–305 Google Scholar
  27. Mudd SM, Howell S, Morris JT (2009) Impact of dynamic feedbacks between sedimentation, sea-level rise, and biomass production on near-surface marsh stratigraphy and carbon accumulation. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 82:377–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Neves JP, Ferreira LE, Simões MP, Gazarini LC (2007) Primary production and nutrient content in two salt marsh species, Atriplex portulacoides L. and Limoniastrum monopetalum L. in southern Portugal. Estuaries and Coasts 30:459–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Olson JS (1963) Energy storage and the balance of producers and decomposers in ecological systems. Ecology 44:322–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Orson RA, Warren RS, Niering WA (1987) Development of a tidal marsh in a New England river valley. Estuaries 10:20–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Peek JM (1970) Relation of canopy area and volume to production of three woody species. Ecology 51:1098–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ritchie JC, McHenry JR (1990) Application of radioactive fallout Cs-137 for measuring soil erosion and sediment accumulation patterns: a review. J Environ Qual 19:215–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rittenhouse LR, Sneva FA (1977) A technique for estimating big sagebrush production. J Range Manage 30:68–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Robbins JA (1978) Geochemical and geophysical application of radioactive lead. In: Nriagu JO (ed) The biogeochemistry of lead in the environment. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 407–426Google Scholar
  35. Roman CT, Daiber FC (1984) Aboveground and belowground primary production dynamics of two Delaware Bay tidal marshes. Bull Torrey Bot Club 111:34–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rooth JE, Stevenson JC, Cornwell JC (2003) Increased sediment accretion rates following invasion by Phragmites australis: the role of litter. Estuaries 26:475–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rothman E, Bouchard V (2007) Regulation of carbon processes by macrophyte species in a Great Lakes coastal wetland. Wetlands 27:1134–1143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sah JP, Ross MS, Koptur S, Snyder JR (2004) Estimating aboveground biomass of broadleaved woody plants in the understory of Florida Key pine forests. For Ecol Manage 203:319–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schubauer JP, Hopkinson CS (1984) Above— and belowground emergent macrophyte production and turnover in a coastal marsh ecosystem, Georgia. Limnol Oceanogr 29:1052–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Silberhorn GM (1982) Common plants of the Mid-Atlantic Coast. A Field Guide. The John Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  41. Statistical Analysis System (2003) SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Version 8.0 edition. S.A.S. Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  42. Thomson EF, Mirza SN, Afzal J (1998) Predicting the components of aerial biomass of fourwing saltbush from shrub height and volume. J Range Manage 51:323–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Valiela I, Teal JM, Persson NY (1976) Production and dynamics of experimentally enriched salt marsh vegetation: belowground biomass. Limnol Oceanogr 21:245–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. van de Plassche O, Edwards RJ, van der Borg K, de Jong AFM (2001) 14C wiggle-match dating in high resolution sea-level research. Radiocarbon 43:391–402Google Scholar
  45. Ward LG, Kearney MS, Stevenson JC (1998) Variations in sedimentary environments and accretionary patterns in estuarine marshes undergoing rapid submergence, Chesapeake Bay. Mar Geol 151:111–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Warren RS, Niering WA (1993) Vegetation change on a northeast tidal marsh: interaction of sea-level rise and marsh accretion. Ecology 74:96–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. White DA, Weiss TE, Trapani JM, Thien LB (1978) Productivity and decomposition of the dominant salt marsh plants in Louisiana. Ecology 59:751–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Williams RB, Murdoch MB (1972) Compartmental analysis of the production of Juncus roemerianus in a North Carolina salt marsh. Chesapeake Sci 13:69–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Woerner LS, Hackney CT (1997) Distribution of Juncus roemerianus in North Carolina tidal marshes: the importance of physical and biotic variables. Wetlands 17:284–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zervas C (2001) Sea Level Variations of the United States 1854–1999. NOAA technical report NOS CO-OPS 36. NOAA National Ocean Service, Silver Spring, MD, 186pp.<http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/publications/techrpt36doc.pdf>

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tracy Elsey-Quirk
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Denise M. Seliskar
    • 2
  • Christopher K. Sommerfield
    • 2
  • John L. Gallagher
    • 2
  1. 1.Patrick Center for Environmental ResearchAcademy of Natural Sciences PhiladelphiaPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.School of Marine Science and PolicyUniversity of DelawareLewesUSA

Personalised recommendations